Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | Hank | 177175 | ||
MJH - Well, it is interesting to say the least that you downgrade the "Q" document issue from "strong evidence" in your initial post on the subject to "theory" in your second post. At least we seem to be progressing toward a more accurate representation of the matter :-) --Hank | ||||||
2 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177185 | ||
Well, actually "strong evidence" and "theory" are the same thing. A theory is something that can not be "proofed" but there is a lot of evidence to support the idea. I do think there is strong evidence to support a 'Q' of some sort, if not in writting, then certainly in oral transmision. But it is still just a theory. MJH |
||||||
3 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | Hank | 177190 | ||
MJH - I disagree that "strong evidence and theory are the same thing." They are no more the same thing than hearsay and heresy. I give you a case in point. The "theory" of evolution has never been able to present "strong evidence" that it is valid. Theories are theories, that and nothing more; but strong evidence is something else. Mere theories don't carry weight in a court of law but strong evidence certainly does. Strong evidence has substance; it is something you can sink your teeth into. Theory is really nothing more than opinion, and even though in some instances it may be "educated" opinion, it is nevertheless opinion. Theories that are postulated before all the pertinent facts are in are merely assumptions. --Hank | ||||||
4 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 177220 | ||
Hank, Another example of an unsupported theory is this: "strong evidence and theory are the same thing". Grace to you, John |
||||||